Central European History 53 (2020), 1–19. © Central European History Society of the American Historical Association, 2020 doi:10.1017/S000893892000014X “On the Border of Old Age”: An Entangled History of Eldercare in East Germany James Chappel ABSTRACT. Historical research has turned in the last years more intensively toward entangled and transnational histories of biopolitics, the family, and the welfare state, but without renewed interest in aging and pension policy, a sphere of human experience that is often interrogated in parochial terms, if at all. An analysis of the culture and policies of old age in East Germany in the 1950s and 1960s shows the importance of a transnational history of this subject. The GDR, the Communist state with the greatest proportion of elderly citizens, needed to create a socialist model of aging. Neither the Communist tradition in Weimar Germany, nor the experience of the other states in the Communist bloc provided substantial guidance. East Germans looked instead for inspiration to West Germany, which was itself engaged in a debate about aging and pension policy. By grappling with the Western experience, including its perceived and real limitations, the GDR in the Ulbricht developed a vision of what it meant to age as a socialist. Die historische Forschung hat sich in den letzten Jahren intensiver mit der verwobenen transna- tionalen Geschichte von Biopolitik, Familie und Wohlfahrtsstaat befasst. Trotz dieser Entwicklung wurden die Themen Altern und Rentenpolitik weiter nur am Rande untersucht. Der Beitrag untersucht Kultur und Politiken des Alterns in Ostdeutschland in den 1950er und 1960er Jahren und zeigt die Wichtigkeit eines transnationalen Ansatzes für die Analyse dieses Thema. Die DDR, als der kommunistische Staat mit dem höchsten Anteil älterer Menschen, musste ein sozialistisches Modell des Alterns entwerfen. Doch weder die kommunistische Tradition der Weimarer Republik noch die Erfahrungen der anderen Staaten des Ostblocks boten hierfür eine Orientierung. Stattdessen suchten die GDR Anregungen in der BRD, wo ebenso Debatten über das Altern und die Rentenpolitik geführt wurden. Durch die Auseinandersetzung mit den westdeutschen Erfahrungen – inklusive der wahrgenommenen und tatsächlichen Grenzen – entwickelte die DDR der Ulbricht-Ära ihre Vision davon, was es bedeutete, im Sozialismus zu altern. N the summer of 1959, East Germans tuned into a program called On the Border of Old Age (An der Grenze des Alters). For the first twenty minutes, a reporter patiently Iexplained the horrors of aging in neighboring West Germany. Drawing on kindred efforts by West German television producers, the program presented a colorful portrait of miserable old age on the other side of the Iron Curtain. Western factories, viewers were told, employed only the young, while close-ups of want ads proved that many employers explicitly barred the elderly from applying. Where, then, were the elderly? “We found them,” the host explained, “on the street,”“killing time,” with no purpose, as “time stands still for them.” Inhospitable workplaces and insufficient pensions forced them to improvise. Some begged on the streets, others lived in scandalously insufficient nursing homes, while yet others lived poor and alone in basement rooms. The show followed one 1 2 JAMES CHAPPEL old woman in Cologne as she gathered firewood from yards and was accosted by young rowdies in convertibles. The segment ended with a depiction of a group of elderly women slowly and mournfully marching across a courtyard (see Figure 1). It featured an ironic soundtrack. The viewer could hear the peals of the “Freedom Bell,” a replica of the Liberty Bell that rang daily from West Berlin’s city hall throughout the Cold War, while a somber voice intoned its inscription, describing a commitment to individual dignity. The bell sounds in context like a church bell, and the overall effect is to reinterpret the sound, which was beamed into East Germany from the West every week: not a celebration of freedom, but a funeral dirge. A consideration of the elderly, it seemed, showed how hollow the promises of the West German regime—and its Atlantic ideology—truly were.1 The program then cut to a sort of talk show set at a retirement home (Feierabendheim)in East Berlin, where viewers were instructed about the wonders of old age in communist East Germany. The host had a relaxed and unedited conversation with four residents, between sixty-eight and eighty-two years old, and as the set-up was supposed to show, the interview was a cheerful affair (see Figure 2). The guests emphasized the advantages of East German social policy, which allowed them to afford the residence with money to spare. Unlike in the West, their well-being was not tied to their previous class standing nor to individual entrepreneurship, but was a well-deserved thank-you from the socialist nation after a lifetime of labor. They emphasized the “joy” they had taken in labor and their gratitude that they had been able to work for so long. One of them explained that it would have been “very hard” for him to be kicked out of the labor force at sixty-five, given the great satisfaction he had taken in working to the age of seventy-three. The four residents expressed sorrow and sym- pathy for their age cohort in the West. They were being treated so poorly, one of them the- orized, because the West Germans knew full well that veterans of two world wars would not be willing to fight in a third—and that, after all, was in their view the true aim of the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG).2 The East German TV program—its title and its content—reminds us that the border between youth and old age was just as politicized as the one between the two Germanys. This essay walks that border, exploring the history of East German eldercare in the 1950s and 1960s from a transnational and entangled perspective. The goal here is not to describe or investigate eldercare in the German Democratic Republic (GDR) in its totality.3 The more modest aim is to show that East Germans very much had West Germans on their mind when crafting their response to their aging citizenry: they observed the West, they were happy to repeat and absorb the critiques of West German aging policy made by Western critics, and they were committed to crafting a form of socialist aging that would correct the perceived pathologies of its capitalist variant. To show how, the essay will 1An der Grenze des Alters, DDR Fernsehbeitrag vom August 19, 1959 (ID 061621), available for viewing at Deutsches Rundfunkarchiv, these quotations from 2:25 to 2:30; the story of the woman in Cologne begins at 16:15, screenshot at 18:53. 2An der Grenze des Alters, labor joy at 28:20 and 29:00, military conspiracy at 31:40, this screenshot at 20:37. 3Others have done so. See also James Chappel, “Old Volk: Aging in 1950s Germany, East and West,” Journal of Modern History 90 (2018): 792–833; Dierk Hoffmann, Am Rande der sozialistischen Arbeitsgesellschaft. Rentner in der DDR, 1945–1990 (Erfurt: Landeszentrale für politische Bildung, 2010); Philipp Springer, Da konnt’ ich mich dann so’n bißchen entfalten. Die Volkssolidarität in der SBZ/DDR 1945–1969 (New York: Peter Lang, 1999). ON THE BORDER OF OLD AGE 3 Fig. 1 - B/W online, B/W in print Fig. 1. The elderly in West Germany, as portrayed on An der Grenze des Alters (On the Border of Old Age), an East German television program from August 19, 1959. draw on popular media, social-scientific literature, and above all the archives and publications of People’s Solidarity (Volkssolidarität, hereafter VS), the premier eldercare organization in East Germany. These sources will be explored to make two basic arguments, one in each of the essay’s major sections: first, that an entangled perspective helps us to explain the very existence of the VS, and its focus on eldercare; second, that the specific shape of com- munist eldercare can best be understood as a direct response to the perceived pathologies of capitalist aging. Specifically, East Germans were unimpressed with what they called, with some justice, the “reactionary pension reform” that West Germany passed in 1957, so they sought alternative imaginaries of care.4 Eldercare is not often historicized, but it represents a massive component of state budgets and individual experiences. It provides, therefore, a fresh vantage point on some familiar questions, most importantly that of the nature of the East German regime. For years, the reigning interpretation of East Germany as a whole was the “welfare dictatorship” model pro- vided by Konrad H. Jarausch, according to which the regime relied on (unsustainable) welfare programs to ensure the support of an oppressed, but quiescent, citizenry. Recent scholars have nuanced this view, suggesting that East Germany became a welfare dictatorship in the Honecker era of the 1970s–1980s, but that the term does not adequately describe the more austere and ideological era of the 1950s–1960s.5 This should lead scholars to rethink the 4“Bonn greift Renten an,” Berliner Zeitung, January 18, 1956, 5. 5Konrad H. Jarausch, “Care and Coercion: The GDR as Welfare Dictatorship,” in Dictatorship as Experience: Towards a Socio-Cultural History of the GDR, ed. Konrad H. Jarausch (New York: Berghahn Books, 1999), 47–69; Donna Harsch, Revenge of the Domestic: Women, the Family, and Communism in the 4 JAMES CHAPPEL Fig. 2 - B/W online, B/W in print Fig. 2. The elderly in West Germany, as portrayed on An der Grenze des Alters (On the Border of Old Age), an East German television program from August 19, 1959. Ulbricht era, when the East regime was pioneering kinds of social policy that do not recog- nizably fit into the framework of “welfare.”6 East Germans in the Ulbricht era actually viewed West Germany as the welfare dictatorship—as the regime, in other words, that per- petuated traditional styles of Bismarckean welfare alongside fascist and militarist politics.